Cancer and Technology: Top 10 Highest-Radiation Cell Phones

We usually linked fear of wifi and cellphone radiation with the tinfoil hat brigade, but more evidence is coming out that indicates we should be concerned. A 13-country study looked at the issue, and Tyler Hamilton says it is " the most comprehensive look at the potential link between cellphone use and cancer, involves the pooled analysis of thousands of cases of tumours in the head and neck area: gliomas, meningiomas, acoustic neuromas and parotid gland tumours. It was originally supposed to be completed in 2004 and published in 2006. Years later the final report has still not been released, a source of frustration among some scientists who say such a delay would never be tolerated in the context of a drug study."

the highest-radiation cellphones in the US from CNET- a lot of blackberries!

One researcher explains that over 50 scientists have to sign off on the final, but that it will come out "soon." Some of the reports that are part of the study have been released, and they point to increases in tumours and cancer. Their biggest worry is the use by young people, who have a lot of years of cumulative cellphone use ahead of them. As one researcher said:

"Nobody will stop using this technology. There are car accidents and still we keep driving cars. The question is what precautions do we take?" ::Tyler Hamilton in the Star

Tara Parker-Pope in the New York Times weighed in on the issue:

Some doctors say the real concern is not older cellphone users, who began using phones as adults, but children who are beginning to use phones today and face a lifetime of exposure.

"More and more kids are using cellphones," said Dr. Paul J. Rosch, clinical professor of medicine and psychiatry at New York Medical College. "They may be much more affected. Their brains are growing rapidly, and their skulls are thinner." ::New York Times

Tyler Hamilton's recommendations to minimize cellphone radiation exposure:

Use an earpiece instead of holding the device to your head, particularly for longer conversations.

Keep conversations to a minimum.

Avoid long conversations in locations, such as rural areas or enclosed areas, where a cellphone's network signal is weak. A weak signal makes the phone emit more power so it can connect to a faraway cell tower.

If you buy your preteen or young teenager a phone, make sure he or she follows the above precautionary measures.

TreeHugger on Cellphone Radiation
Mobile phones 'more dangerous than smoking' : TreeHugger
Survey: Your Brain on Cellphones : TreeHugger
Ask TreeHugger: Do Cell Phones Give You a Headache? : TreeHugger
Electrical Smog: More on "Frequency Pollution" : TreeHugger

and our favourite:

Spray-on Defense from WiFi and Cellphones : TreeHugger

Comments

[marsrocks]

Quote from Dr. Rhett Herman, physics professor at Radford University:

This keeps cropping up with a number of people because of a misunderstanding.
The frequencies of cell phone radiation are in the giga-Hertz (giga="billion") . For comparison, your power in your house wiring radiates at 60 Hertz, FM radio stations are from 88-108 mega-hertz , and your satellite TV dish is scooping up giga-hertz frequencies.

However, the frequency of visible light, that comes out of your light bulbs is over 100,000 times higher than those giga-hertz frequencies. The "desctructive power" of radiation is directly proportional to frequency. The higher the frequency, the more powerful the radiation is. If you are not worried about cancer from your nightlight, or cancer from living in the daylight hours (not being a vampire) then you shouldn't be worried about your cell phone.

As for his comment about kids and risk : despite the thinner skulls, the thinnest layer of *skin* has enough water in it to stop dead in its tracks radiation in the giga-hertz range. Put a centimeter of skin/blood/fat/skull in front of that radiation then it's completely kaput by the time it reaches the brain. Couple that with the wrong frequency to do any genetic damage.As for concern about UV radiation from the sun: "Their frequency is higher than that of visible light. Thus, their destructive power is finally over a DNA-harming threshold." Wear sunblock and avoid tanning beds. "

[nudger]

You can eliminate essentially all the risk inherent in cell phones by simply not using them while driving or walking near traffic.

[GeeBee]

Go take a look at this article.

http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/93/3/166

This "link" between cell phones and cancer was debunked years ago, but still it lingers on. People have to have a reason for everything , rather than accepting that sometimes, shit just happens.

[noozone]

Hey, read what the article says... the evidence since that report years ago has gotten better and scientists are saying that it does appear to be a much stronger link than was previously thought.

[blueshield]

It's not accurate to say the link was debunked - the article is out of date.

In meta-studies (large reviews of many smaller individual studies) the results are mixed, but it's beginning to look like there's a correlation after many years of use. Some medical professionals suggest you're better off not being a guinea pig and finding out after 15 years. Read this from "AskMen.com", make up your own mind:

"A meta-analysis of 12 studies by Lahkola et al. (2006) found little indication for increased risk of analog or digital phone use and brain tumors. Similarly, a meta-analysis of nine studies by Kan et al. (2008) found no overall increased risk for brain tumors with cell phone use, but a statistically significant 95% increase in the risk of brain tumors for long-term cell phone users (10 years or longer) according to five studies that recorded long-term data. Lastly, in two meta-analyses by Hardell et al. (2006 and 2008), long-term cell phone users were almost twice as likely than non-users to have developed acoustic neuromas (evaluated in three studies) and gliomas (evaluated in four studies), two types of brain tumors, on the same side of the brain (called ipsilateral cancers -- something that studies often fail to investigate)."

[Counterglow]

The information in your link is out of date. Did you know that?

[SallyH499]

The article is very old and reminds me of the tobacco debate - deny on behalf of industry. Try something more current like the recent and independent bioinitiative report (august 2007):
http://www.bioinitiative.org/report/index.htm

Ask yourself why France's National Library Giving Up Wi-Fi - April 7, 2008
http://www.next-up.org/pdf/FranceNationalLibraryGivesUpWiFi07042008.pdf
And why we are not informed about the health risks reported in Europe and elsewhere where countries are taking steps to protect the public health?

http://www.strategy-business.com/li/leadingideas/li00004 - excellent article from a business journal discussing the slowdown in the cell phone market, due to saturation, which has led the industry to target U.S. children to pump up sales. It also points out opportunity in developing a safer technology for one of these companies - if only they would take it.

Study released March 2008 ( http://www.brain-surgery.us/mobph.pdf ) by cancer expert, and top neurosurgeon who has received 14 awards over the past 16 years and has published more than three dozen scientific papers. He concludes, "Mobile phones could kill far more people than smoking or asbestos," and that governments and the mobile phone industry must take "immediate steps" to reduce exposure to their radiation."

International Association of Firefighter's official statement on commercial antennas here. http://www.iaff.org/hs/Facts/CellTowerFinal.asp Why do fire fighters oppose commercial antennas on their buildings for health reasons? You might want to find out.

[Obamican7]

Digital Funtown news does a hilarious send up on this topic. Hold on to your hats (for your cerebellum's sake, apparently).

[damnadamson]

never had one never will ... who wants to be reached 24/7 ???

[drumz]

They do have on/off switches and you can see who's calling. But with the earth being flat and all...

[ibsteve2u]

Hey - seeing as how governments (at the behest of insurance company money funneled through lobbyists) are falling willy-nilly all over themselves to stop second-hand smoke hazards by banning cigarette smoking everywhere, I should be able to agitate to stop second-hand cellular-level irradiation by way of insisting on the banning of cell phone use in public areas and on public conveyances, right?

Right?

[SomaMinneapolis]

I guess we're going to find out.